Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=674060 --- Comment #6 from Michal Fojtik <mfojtik@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-02-10 11:03:53 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > (In reply to comment #3) > > > * Check > > > - pushd ./%{geminstdir} is not stepping into the correct directory. > > > The right one is: pushd %{buildroot}%{geminstdir} > > > > AFAIK it's stepping to buildroot, but I replaced ./ with that macro just for > > sure. Thanks for noticing that. > > > > > * Shipping external project > > > - This gem bundles external project in support folder. On Fedora shipping > > > external project in the same package should (must) be avoided, see: > > > > Ouch, sorry I built that gem in support directory so there was some leftovers. > > It should be fixed now. > > Still the same gem file is bundled => it is not fixed yet. Sorry for that, seems like building this RPM inside support directory wasn't good idea... > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Bundling_of_multiple_projects > > > > > > * Missing dependencies > > > - Since this is Sinatra application, there have to be specified > > > appropriate dependencies: > > > > > > Require: rubygem(sinatra) > > > BuildRequire: rubygem(sinatra) > > > > Require: rubygem(sinatra) was already here but it was missing in BuildRequire. > > Should be fixed now. > > > > > - Missing rubygem-net-ssh dependency. Not sure if it is runtime > > > or just development dependency > > > > That's right, thanks for corrections. > > > > > > > > - There are missing plenty of others, such as rack. Please test using mock. > > > > Should be fixed now. Note that other dependencies like 'rubygem-aws' are not > > 'runtime' dependencies but they are optional. Eg. for using EC2 or other cloud > > providers. > > > > > * rpmlint output: > > > - Is this package ahead of upstream? > > > > > > $ rpmlint rubygem-deltacloud-core.spec > > > rubygem-deltacloud-core.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: > > > http://gems.rubyforge.org/gems/deltacloud-core-0.2.0.gem > > > HTTP Error 404: Not Found > > > 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. > > > > Yes, I'll need to wait with importing until this package will be available in > > upstream (which should happen in next few days). > > > > > > > > I am not going forward with this review, since I cannot build on my environment > > > due to missing dependencies. > > > > ======================= v0.2.0-2 ====================== > > > > Spec URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/deltacloud-core.spec > > SRPM URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/deltacloud-core-0.2.0-2.fc14.src.rpm > > > > Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2761635 > > * Rawhide build > - The package cannot be build against rawhide, since rawhide contains newer > Sinatra package and there are missing dependencies (tilt, may be others). > But this might very well be Sinatra package flaw, since tilt is required in > lib/sinatra/base.rb for sinatra 1.1.2 (hmm, no test suite executed during > Sinatra build, so no surprise :/ ) > > * Project name > - You have renamed the project, but I have some doubts about that. I believe > it should be discussed in Ruby-SIG. Are there some policies for shipping > Rails/Sinatra/Other Ruby applications? The reasons are bellow. > > - Is there any chance that any other gem will use the code in lib? If no, > then > it just pollutes Ruby load path and should be avoided to prevent > unnecessary > name collisions. Well I guess all gems are separated and it will not pollute anything when it will not be explicitly required with 'require'. > - This package should be manageable just by RPM. Managing by RubyGems has no > benefits for Fedora nor Ruby environment. Therefore please consider > providing package in tar.gz or similar form instead of gem. I agree, this is something that needs to be discussed in Ruby-SIG. > * Shipping external project > - This gem bundles external projects in lib/sinatra folder. On Fedora > shipping external project in the same package should (must) be avoided, > see: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Bundling_of_multiple_projects Well it ships some rack middleware, which is not packaged and those are just single files with our modifications. Rack-Accept is also our modification which is not compatible with upstream either fedora package. Another things are OK I guess, url_for is also our source, not external one (managed and created by us). > * Licensing > - lib/deltacloud/drivers/opennebula is GPLv2.1+ Yes, but since we switched code to Apache Incubator, all sources are now under ASF licence. I'll fix the licence in upstream. Will upload new version tomorrow. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review